SAMPAT KUMAR Vs. RAMA KAPOOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 12th January, 2015 whereby the application for leave to defend filed by the petitioner Sampat Kumar in an eviction petition filed by the respondent Smt. Rama Kapoor and Mr. Rajeev Kapoor was dismissed being time barred, the petitioner prefers the present petition.

(2.) Rama Kapoor and Rajeev Kapoor filed an eviction petition in respect of a shop and a kolki situated on the ground floor of property bearing No.64/1(Part), near House No.269, Katra Pedan, Tilak Bazar, Delhi-110006 on the ground that the same was required bonafidely for the wife of Rajeev Kapoor who wants to settle a business of general merchandise and stationery from the tenanted premises to add to the income of the eviction petitioners.

(3.) Summons in the eviction petition in form prescribed under Schedule III of the DRC Act were issued vide order dated 15th May, 2013. Vide order dated 17th September, 2013 the Court noted that summons as per prescribed form sent to the respondent by ordinary process at address were received unserved with the remarks "shop is lying closed for long time" and by registered post were received back unserved with the remarks "premises found locked". On the second address summons sent in the prescribed form by way of ordinary process were received back unserved with the remarks "no such person resides". The Court noted that the application for leave to defend was filed by the petitioner on 3rd July, 2013, however in the said application there is no mention when service was affected on the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner was directed to file envelope i.e. registered post to show when service was effected on the petitioner.